1.875m Parts

[Sylandro]

Similar to Home Grown Rocket Parts's 1.875 meter parts. Like the 3.75 meter parts, the 1.875 meter parts will be made by a new spacecraft company. The 1.875 meter part's creator will be a company called Kerbworks Spacecraft Division.

There would be four 1.875m fuel tanks, long, medium, short and mini. Three engines. The Kerbworks-15 Engine, which would be a low-thrust engine that would only be useful for station rendezvous. (Think of the engine on the Cygnus: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8a/Cygnus_Orb-D1.5.jpg ) Then, there would be the Kerbworks-30 Engine, which would be a short, corpulent orbital achievement engine, which would be similar to the LV-909. And then, at last, but not least, the Kerbworks-45 Engine, which has MORE POWER and thrust, and fuel consumption than a LV-30. But it has thrust vectoring.

Then, there would be a 1.875m SAS module, and a remote guidance unit, called the RC-002M ATV Core. Of course, for looks, there would be a 1.875 meter-to-1.25 meter adapter, and a 1.875 meter to a 2.5 meter adapter. And, just for fun, there would be a 1.875m command module called the Kerbworks "Adagio" Command Module, that can contain two kerbonauts. and at last, but not least, there would be a 1.875 meter hitchhiker module called the PPD-05 Mini Hitchiker Storage Module that can maintain three kerbonauts.

Oh, and for stations, there would be a 1.875 meter docking port called the Clamp-O-Tron Teenager.

[BudgetHedgehog]

And why would this be a good thing for KSP?

I'm not saying it'd be a bad thing, but I honestly don't see the point of it.

[Sylandro]

For people who want a happy medium between 1.25 meter parts and 2.5 meter parts. Or, for people who would like MORE power. or for people who want to make stock ATV's.

[Sylandro]

For people who want a happy medium between 1.25 meter parts and 2.5 meter parts. Or, for people who would like MORE power. or for people who want to make stock ATV's.

[vosechu]

I would support this. I would also love to see some more love on the 0.625m front though there is the RLA_Stockalike mod for that. I haven't seen any mods that cover this size range yet.

You might be able to work with the mod author who does TweakScale in the meantime?

- - - Updated - - -

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/80234-TweakScale-Rescale-Everything%21

[Sylandro]

We could even have a 0.625 meter command module like Copenhagen Suborbital's Tycho Brahe: http://copsub.com/spacecraft-2/tycho-brahe/ . That would be the bomb. Even having a small, medium and large 0.625 meter fuel tank would be neat. Also, more 0.625 meter engines would be neat.

[DerpenWolf]

I actually like this concept mainly because that means we could get a Gemini and Soyuz like capsules that would fit in quite well (maybe even a mini circular hitchhiker that looks like the Soyuz front habitation bit!)

[Sirrobert]

I see no reason for this

[Kasuha]

I'm all for completing the 0.625 m series, adding more fuel tanks, engines, n-couplers, reaction wheel, maybe even command pod (or at least give balanced axial mount point to command chair). I don't see much point in adding 1.875 m parts, though.

[Red Iron Crown]

I agree with the above posters, 0.625, 1.25, 2.5 and 3.75m are enough variety of sizes for the vast majority of scenarios. Kasuha's right that the 0.625m part lineup needs to be fleshed out a bit (as well as 3.75m). A 0.625m pod would have to look like a coffin, which may or may not be appropriate.

[Sylandro]

Think about Career Mode, you'll get 1.875 meter parts before you would get 2.5 meter parts. More power before you get mainsails.

[BudgetHedgehog]

Oh no, however did we cope before them..

[J.Random]

For people who want a happy medium between 1.25 meter parts and 2.5 meter parts. Or, for people who would like MORE power. or for people who want to make stock ATV's.

You're discriminating all those people who would want a happy medium between 1.25m and 1.875m, or between 1.875m and 2.5m. Or those who would want happy medium between previous mediums. Wait, I have an idea: how about 4 fuel tanks for each 0.0001 increment between 0.001m and 5m radius? Also, adapters for every radius combination.

[Red Iron Crown]

Procedural parts would solve many of these problems.

[Kasuha]

Procedural parts will probably need an update with upcoming release - to add appropriate price to each size of procedurally generated part. In my opinion the only reasonable approach is cubic function.

[Seret]

Tbh, I would probably use these parts of they were in the game. I find 2.5m a bit big and 1.25 a bit small for a lot of the stuff I build. But I do agree with the others that there's no great need for them. I find the 3.75m parts a bit pointless, but most other people seem to love 'em, so I think the amount of us finding 1.875m parts useful would be pretty minimal.

[Red Iron Crown]

Procedural parts will probably need an update with upcoming release - to add appropriate price to each size of procedurally generated part. In my opinion the only reasonable approach is cubic function.

Fuel costs are separate, according to the latest dev notes. Maybe a surface area calculation for the tank itself?

[Comrade Jenkens]

the 0.625m and the 3.75m line ups need more love at the moment.

[Kasuha]

Fuel costs are separate, according to the latest dev notes. Maybe a surface area calculation for the tank itself?

Let's take the simplest example - scaling a fuel tank (i.e. a cylinder). It takes two parameters, l (length) and r (radius) What do we get there?

C0: constant price for things that don't need to scale with the part, e.g. sensors or fuel pump (we all know how capable KSP fuel pumps are, they definitely don't need any scaling)

C1: price which scales with r^2, such as sheet metal to cover bottom and top of the cylinder

C2: price which scales with r x l, such as sheet metal to cover sides of the cylinder

C3: price which scales with l x r^2 such as structural beams preventing the thing to collapse

But I think in reality mod authors will settle with something simpler.

[Red Iron Crown]

I always assumed fuel pumps were part of an engine rather than a tank, which would make sense given that different engines require different flow rates. I think C0 is close enough to zero that it can be ignored. An area calculation would seem well suited to procedural tanks, and certainly a simple enough abstraction that it's easy to implement. Though maybe a structural component proportional to wet mass would be more realistic.

[Kasuha]

I always assumed fuel pumps were part of an engine rather than a tank, which would make sense given that different engines require different flow rates.

Okay then we can call it valves. For the sake of realism there should be some C0. Of course that's just theoretical implementation, though.

Fuel tanks would probably have most in C2, while engines would likely have most in C3 as they need to scale completely.

Let's just hope there will be such thing like non-constant price API for parts, otherwise procedural mod authors will start having some problems.

[Red Iron Crown]

How do procedurals work now? I mean, obviously they're calculating and changing part parameters in-game, one would think cost is just another parameter like the others.

[Kasuha]

How do procedurals work now? I mean, obviously they're calculating and changing part parameters in-game, one would think cost is just another parameter like the others.

Size of the part is given by its model and scaling parameter. If the mod has control over generating the model, it can prepare it at any size.

Cost is at present configurable parameter in part.cfg. For normal parts I assume that will be dry mass price of the part. No idea how it will work for procedural ones.

[nli2work]

RLA_Stockalike mod has many excellent 0.625 sized parts.

[Red Iron Crown]

Some part.cfg parameters change, though. Like mass, capacity and fuel type. I don't think it's going to be a big deal for modders.